All Issue

2026 Vol.42, Issue 4 Preview Page
Dynamic Behavior of a Vertical Shaft of a Deep Railway Structure under Seismic Loading Using Three-Dimensional Numerical Analysis

3차원 수치해석을 통한 대심도 철도 수직구의 지진 시 동적 거동 분석

DongHa Baek1†
,
Taeyeab Kim2†
,
MinTaek Yoo3*
백 동하1†
,
김 태엽2†
,
유 민택3*
1Member, Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil Environmental Engineering, Gachon Univ.
2CEO, Papaya co.
3Member, Assistant Prof., Dept. of Civil Environmental Engineering, Gachon Univ.
1정회원, 가천대학교 토목환경공학과 석사과정
2비회원, 파파야 CEO
3정회원, 가천대학교 토목환경공학과 조교수
*Corresponding Author
† 백동하, 김태엽은 공동 제1저자로서 본 연구에 동등하게 기여하였음.
31 August 2026. pp. 209-221
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

This study investigated the dynamic behavior of a vertical shaft under seismic loading, considering soil–structure interaction, through three-dimensional finite-element dynamic analyses in OpenSees. Four cases combined two ground conditions—weathered soil and fill, classified according to the Korean seismic design code (KDS 17 10 00; MOLIT, 2018)—with shaft embedment depths of 16 and 30 m. Both soil layers were modeled as dry sand, and their nonlinear behavior was simulated using the pressure-dependent multiyield model. Four recorded ground motions were scaled to a peak ground acceleration of 0.154 g for a 1000-year return period and applied as input to evaluate the displacement and bending-moment responses of the shaft. The results indicate that the depth profile of the bending moment markedly varied with embedment depth: the 16-m cases exhibited a cantilever-type response, with the moment increasing monotonically toward the shaft base, whereas the 30-m cases exhibited a double-curvature (S-shaped) distribution, with a sign reversal at a depth of ~20 m. The overall response magnitudes increased with increasing embedment depth and decreasing soil stiffness. The fill–30-m case (site class S5) generally produced the largest responses across the ground motions considered. These findings clarify the effects of embedment depth and soil stiffness on the depth-dependent seismic behavior of vertical shafts under ground conditions representative of domestic practice.

Keywords
Dynamic numerical analysis
Earthquake
Soil-structure interaction
Three-dimensional analysis model
Vertical shaft

본 연구는 지반-구조물 상호작용을 고려하여 국내 내진설계기준(KDS 17 10 00; MOLIT, 2018)에 따른 지반조건(풍화토, 매립토)과 수직구 근입 심도(16m, 30m)를 조합한 4가지 케이스에 대해 3차원 유한요소 동적 해석을 수행함으로써 수직구의 동적 거동 특성을 분석하였다. 두 지반은 모두 건조 사질토로 가정하여 다중항복면 소성모델(Pressure Depend Multi Yield, PDMY)로 비선형 거동을 모사하였으며, 1000년 재현주기 PGA(0.154g)로 조정된 4개 계측 지진파를 입력하여 수직구의 변위 및 휨모멘트 응답을 검토하였다. 해석 결과, 근입 심도에 따라 수직구의 심도별 휨모멘트 분포 형태가 뚜렷하게 달라졌는데, 16m 조건은 모멘트가 저면까지 단조 증가하는 캔틸레버형 거동을, 30m 조건은 심도 약 20m 지점에서 부호가 반전되는 이중곡률(S자형) 거동을 나타내었다. 아울러 심도가 깊고 지반이 연약할수록 응답 크기 자체도 증폭되어 매립토 30m 조건(S5 지반)에서 모든 지진파에 대해 가장 큰 응답이 나타났다. 본 연구는 동적 유한요소 해석을 수행하여 국내 지반조건 및 지진 특성에 따른 수직구의 응답 특성에 대한 자료를 제공한다.

References
1

Hashash, Y.M.A., Hook, J.J., Schmidt, B., and Yao, J.I-C. (2001), “Seismic Design and Analysis of Underground Structures”, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol.16, No.4, pp.247-293, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-7798(01)00051-7.

10.1016/S0886-7798(01)00051-7
2

Iida, H., Hiroto, T., Yoshida, N., and Iwafuji, M. (1996), “Damage to Daikai Subway Station”, Soils and Foundations, Special Issue, Vol.36, pp.283-300, https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.36.Special_283.

10.3208/sandf.36.Special_283
3

Kwon, S.Y. and Yoo, M. (2021), “A Study on the Dynamic Behavior of a Vertical Tunnel Shaft Embedded in Liquefiable Ground during Earthquakes”, Applied Sciences, Vol.11, No.4, p.1560, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11041560.

10.3390/app11041560
4

Lee, J., Lee, I.W., Choo, Y.W., and Yoo, M. (2020), “Centrifuge and Numerical Simulation of Pile Supported Slab Track System Behavior on Soft Soil under Seismic Loading”, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol.24, No.11, pp.3179-3188, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-020-1885-1.

10.1007/s12205-020-1885-1
5

Li, Y., Zhao, M., Xu, C.S., Du, X.L., and Li, Z. (2018), “Earthquake Input for Finite Element Analysis of Soil-structure Interaction on Rigid Bedrock”, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol.79, pp.250-262, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2018.05.008.

10.1016/j.tust.2018.05.008
6

Lu, J., Elgamal, A., and Yang, Z. (2011), OpenSeesPL: 3D Lateral Pile-Ground Interaction, User Manual, Beta 1.0. Department of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego.

7

Lyon, B., Candia, G., Gutiérrez, C., and Macedo, J. (2022), “Performance-based Analysis of Transit Tunnels in the Chilean Subduction Zone”, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol.152, p.107047, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.107047.

10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.107047
8

McKenna, F. (2011), “OpenSees: A Framework for Earthquake Engineering Simulation”, Computing in Science & Engineering, Vol.13, No.4, pp.58-66, https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2011.66.

10.1109/MCSE.2011.66
9

Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) (2018), General Seismic Design (KDS 17 10 00), Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, Sejong, Korea (in Korean).

10

Nikolaou, S., Mylonakis, G., Gazetas, G., and Tazoh, T. (2001), “Kinematic Pile Bending during Earthquakes: Analysis and Field Measurements”, Géotechnique, Vol.51, No.5, pp.425-440, https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2001.51.5.425.

10.1680/geot.2001.51.5.425
11

Penzien, J. and Wu, C.L. (1998), “Stresses in Linings of Bored Tunnels”, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, Vol.27, No.3, pp.283-300, https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199803)27:3<283::AID-EQE732<3.0.CO;2-T.

10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199803)27:3<283::AID-EQE732>3.0.CO;2-T
12

Poulos, H.G. and Davis, E.H. (1980), Pile Foundation Analysis and Design, Wiley Series in Geotechnical Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 397 p.

13

Shen, Y., Zhong, Z., Li, L., Du, X., and El Naggar, M.H. (2023), “Seismic Response of Soil-shield Tunnel Systems in Sandwiched Liquefiable Soil Deposits”, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol.140, p.105322, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2023.105322.

10.1016/j.tust.2023.105322
14

Vucetic, M. and Dobry, R. (1991), “Effect of Soil Plasticity on Cyclic Response”, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol.117, No.1, pp.89-107, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:1(89).

10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:1(89)
15

Wang, J.N. (1993), Seismic Design of Tunnels: A Simple State-of-the-Art Design Approach, Parsons Brinckerhoff Monograph.

16

Yu, H. and Li, X. (2017), “Investigation on Damage Mechanism of the Daikai Station Induced by the Strong Kobe Earthquake”, International Journal of Earth & Environmental Sciences, Vol.2, p.147, https://doi.org/10.15344/2456-351X/2017/147.

10.15344/2456-351X/2017/147
17

Zhang, B., Lu, L., Zhong, Z., Du, X., and El Naggar, M.H. (2023), “Analytical Solution for Seismic Response of Vertical Shaft with Primary and Secondary Linings under SH Wave Excitation”, Computers and Geotechnics, Vol.164, p.105813, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2023.105813.

10.1016/j.compgeo.2023.105813
Information
  • Publisher :The Korean Geotechnical Society
  • Publisher(Ko) :한국지반공학회
  • Journal Title :Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society
  • Journal Title(Ko) :한국지반공학회 논문집
  • Volume : 42
  • No :4
  • Pages :209-221
  • Received Date : 2026-07-24
  • Revised Date : 2026-08-09
  • Accepted Date : 2026-08-09
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.7843/kgs.2026.42.4.209
Journal Informaiton Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society
Archives
: Vol.23~28 (2007~2012)
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close